Abstract
Obscenity (the use of rude words or offensive expressions) has spread from informal verbal conversations to digital media, becoming increasingly common on user-generated comments found in Web forums, newspaper user boards, social networks, blogs, and media-sharing sites. The basic obscenity-blocking mechanism is based on verbatim comparisons against a blacklist of banned vocabulary; however, creative users circumvent these filters by obfuscating obscenity with symbol substitutions or bogus segmentations that still visually preserve the original semantics, such as writing shit as $h¡;t or s.h.i.t or even worse mixing them as $.h….¡.t. The number of potential obfuscated variants is combinatorial, yielding the verbatim filter impractical. Here we describe a method intended to obstruct this anomaly inspired by sequence alignment algorithms used in genomics, coupled with a tailor-made edit penalty function. The method only requires to set up the vocabulary of plain obscenities; no further training is needed. Its complexity on screening a single obscenity is linear, both in runtime and memory, on the length of the user-generated text. We validated the method on three different experiments. The first one involves a new dataset that is also introduced in this article; it consists of a set of manually annotated real-life comments in Spanish, gathered from the news user boards of an online newspaper, containing this type of obfuscation. The second one is a publicly available dataset of comments in Portuguese from a sports Web site. In these experiments, at the obscenity level, we observed recall rates greater than 90%, whereas precision rates varied between 75% and 95%, depending on their sequence length (shorter lengths yielded a higher number of false alarms). On the other hand, at the comment level, we report recall of 86%, precision of 91%, and specificity of 98%. The last experiment revealed that the method is more effective in matching this type of obfuscation compared to the classical Levenshtein edit distance. We conclude discussing the prospects of the method to help enforcing moderation rules of obscenity expressions or as a preprocessing mechanism for sequence cleaning and/or feature extraction in more sophisticated text categorization techniques.
- Youssef Bassil and Paul Semaan. 2012. ASR context-sensitive error correction based on Microsoft n-gram dataset. arXiv:1203.5262.Google Scholar
- Djamal Belazzougui and Mathieu Raffinot. 2013. Approximate regular expression matching with multi-strings. Journal of Discrete Algorithms 18, 14--21. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Dirk Johannes Brand. 2016. Automatic Prediction of Comment Quality. Ph.D. Dissertation. Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.Google Scholar
- Pete Burnap and Matthew L. Williams. 2015. Cyber hate speech on Twitter: An application of machine classification and statistical modeling for policy and decision making. Policy and Internet 7, 2, 223--242. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/poi3.85 Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Pete Burnap and Matthew L. Williams. 2016. Us and them: Identifying cyber hate on Twitter across multiple protected characteristics. EPJ Data Science 5, 11. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Erik Cambria, Bjorn Schuller, Bing Liu, Haixun Wang, and Catherine Havasi. 2013. Knowledge-based approaches to concept-level sentiment analysis. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28, 2, 12--14. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ying Chen, Yilu Zhou, Sencun Zhu, and Heng Xu. 2012. Detecting offensive language in social media to protect adolescent online safety. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk, and Trust (PASSAT’12) and the International Conference on Social Computing (SocialCom’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 71--80. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Peter Christen, Ross W. Gayler, Khoi-Nguyen Tran, Jeffrey Fisher, and Dinusha Vatsalan. 2016. Automatic discovery of abnormal values in large textual databases. Journal of Data and Information Quality 7, 1-2, Article No. 7. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2889311 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Yun-Sheng Chung, Wei-Hsun Lee, Chuan Yi Tang, and Chin Lung Lu. 2007. RE-MuSiC: A tool for multiple sequence alignment with regular expression constraints. Nucleic Acids Research 35, S2, W639--W644. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- David Crystal. 2008. Txtng: The gr8 db8. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
- Jesse Davis and Mark Goadrich. 2006. The relationship between precision-recall and ROC curves. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning. ACM, New York, NY, 233--240. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Luis Fernando D’Haro and Rafael E. Banchs. 2015. Automatic ranking of swear words using word embeddings and pseudo-relevance feedback. In Proceedings of the 2015 Asia-Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference (APSIPA’15). IEEE, New York, NY, 815--820. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Nicholas Diakopoulos. 2016. CommentIQ: Enhancing journalistic curation of online news comments. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web (WWW’16 Companion). 715--716. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2872518.2890099 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Marta Dynel. 2012. Swearing methodologically: The (im)politeness of expletives in anonymous commentaries on YouTube. Journal of English Studies 10, 25--50.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Anthony Y. Fu, Xiaotie Deng, Liu Wenyin, and Greg Little. 2006. The methodology and an application to fight against Unicode attacks. In Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS’06). ACM, New York, NY, 91--101. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1143120.1143132 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Wolf Garbe. 2015. Fast Approximate String Matching with Large Edit Distances in Big Data. Retrieved March 20, 2017, from http://blog.faroo.com/2015/03/24/fast-approximate-string-matching-with-large-edit-distances/.Google Scholar
- Michael Gauthier and Adrien Guille. 2016. Text mining and Twitter to analyze British swearing habits. In Twitter for Research Handbook 2015, 2016, C. Levallois, M. Marchand, T. Mata, and A. Panisson (Eds.). EMLYON Press, Ecully, France, 27--46.Google Scholar
- Jose Gordillo and Eduardo Conde. 2007. An HMM for detecting spam mail. Expert Systems with Applications 33, 667--682. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2006.06.016 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Isabelle Guyon and André Elisseeff. 2003. An introduction to variable and feature selection. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3, 1157--1182.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Peter Hannay and Gregory Baatard. 2012. The 2011 IDN homograph attack mitigation survey. In Proceedings of International Conference on Security and Management (SAM’12). 653--657.Google Scholar
- James N. Helfrich and Rick Neff. 2012. Dual canonicalization: An answer to the homograph attack. In Proceedings of the 2012 eCrime Researchers Summit (eCrime’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1--10.Google Scholar
- Hal Hodson. 2016. Our future language? English rulz OK. New Scientist. Retrieved March 20, 2017, from https://www.newscientist.com/article/2075668-our-future-language-english-rulz-ok-txtspk-and-mind-reading/Google Scholar
- Homa Hosseinmardi, Sabrina Arredondo Mattson, Rahat Ibn Rafiq, Richard Han, Qin Lv, and Shivakant Mishra. 2015. Detection of cyberbullying incidents on the Instagram social network. arXiv:1503.03909.Google Scholar
- Viktor Krammer. 2006. Phishing defense against IDN address spoofing attacks. In Proceedings of the 2006 International Conference on Privacy, Security, and Trust: Bridge the Gap Between PST Technologies and Business Services (PST’06). ACM, New York, NY, Article No. 32. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1501434.1501473 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Gustavo Laboreiro and Eugénio Oliveira. 2014a. Avaliaçao de métodos de desofuscaçao de palavroes. Linguamática 6, 2, 25--43.Google Scholar
- Gustavo Laboreiro and Eugénio Oliveira. 2014b. What we can learn from looking at profanity. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Processing of the Portuguese Language. 108--113. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Seunghak Lee, Iryoung Jeong, and Seungjin Choi. 2007. Dynamically weighted hidden Markov model for spam deobfuscation. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’07). 2523--2529.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Vladimir I. Levenshtein. 1966. Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady 10, 8, 707--710.Google Scholar
- Chun Yuan Lin and Yu Shiang Lin. 2014. Efficient parallel algorithm for multiple sequence alignments with regular expression constraints on graphics processing units. International Journal of Computational Science and Engineering 9, 1--2, 11--20.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Max-Emanuel Maurer and Lukas Höfer. 2012. Sophisticated phishers make more spelling mistakes: Using URL similarity against phishing. In Cyberspace Safety and Security. Springer, 414--426. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Yashar Mehdad and Joel Tetreault. 2016. Do characters abuse more than words? In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue. 299--303. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Christian Mogollón Pinzón and Sergio Rojas-Galeano. 2015. A genomics-based profanity-safe Web forum. In Proceedings of the 10th Computing Colombian Conference (10CCC’15). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 425--430. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Gonzalo Navarro. 2001. A guided tour to approximate string matching. ACM Computing Surveys 33, 1, 31--88. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Saul B. Needleman and Christian D. Wunsch. 1970. A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology 48, 3, 443--453. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/DOI: 10.1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4 Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Marius Nicolae and Sanguthevar Rajasekaran. 2015. On string matching with mismatches. Algorithms 8, 2, 248--270. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Chikashi Nobata, Joel Tetreault, Achint Thomas, Yashar Mehdad, and Yi Chang. 2016. Abusive language detection in online user content. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW’16). 145--153. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2872427.2883062 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Peter Norvig. 2007. How to Write a Spelling Corrector. Retrieved March 20, 2017, from http://norvig.com/spell-correct.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Marco A. F. Pimentel, David A. Clifton, Lei Clifton, and Lionel Tarassenko. 2014. A review of novelty detection. Signal Processing 99, 215--249. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bite Qiu, Ning Fang, and Liu Wenyin. 2010. Detect visual spoofing in Unicode-based text. In Proceedings of the 2010 20th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR’10). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1949--1952. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICPR.2010.480 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Sergio A. Rojas-Galeano. 2013. Revealing non-alphabetical guises of spam-trigger vocables. Dyna 80, 182, 50--57.Google Scholar
- Narges Roshanbin and James Miller. 2011. Finding homoglyphs—a step towards detecting Unicode-based visual spoofing attacks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering. 1--14. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Narges Roshanbin and James Miller. 2016. ADAMAS: Interweaving Unicode and color to enhance CAPTCHA security. Future Generation Computer Systems 55, 289--310. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Takaya Saito and Marc Rehmsmeier. 2015. The precision-recall plot is more informative than the ROC plot when evaluating binary classifiers on imbalanced datasets. PloS One 10, 3, e0118432.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Azianura H. Shaari and Khaleel B. Bataineh. 2015. Netspeak and a breach of formality: Informalization and fossilization of errors in writing among ESL and EFL learners. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education 6, 2, 2165--2173. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Temple F. Smith and Michael S. Waterman. 1981. Identification of common molecular subsequences. Journal of Molecular Biology 147, 1, 195--197. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-2836(81)90087-5 Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Sara Sood, Judd Antin, and Elizabeth Churchill. 2012a. Profanity use in online communities. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 1481--1490. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Sara Sood, Judd Antin, and Elizabeth Churchill. 2012b. Using crowdsourcing to improve profanity detection. In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium: Wisdom of the Crowd.Google Scholar
- Ellen Spertus. 1997. Smokey: Automatic recognition of hostile messages. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence. 1058--1065.Google Scholar
- Megan Squire and Rebecca Gazda. 2015. FLOSS as a source for profanity and insults: Collecting the data. In Proceedings of the 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’15). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 5290--5298. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Teresa Elizabeth Stone, Margaret McMillan, and Mike Hazelton. 2015. Back to swear one: A review of English language literature on swearing and cursing in western health settings. Aggression and Violent Behavior 25, 65--74. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Dennis Venema. 2013. Evolution Basics: Genomes as Ancient Texts, Part 4. Retrieved March 20, 2017, from http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-venema-letters-to-the-duchess/evolution-basics-genomes-as-ancient-texts-part-4.Google Scholar
- David Vilares, Miguel A. Alonso, and Carlos Gómez-Rodríguez. 2015. On the usefulness of lexical and syntactic processing in polarity classification of Twitter messages. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66, 9, 1799--1816. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.23284 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Luis von Ahn. 2014. Offensive/Profane Word List: 1,300+ English Terms That Could Be Found Offensive. Retrieved March 20, 2017, from https://www.cs.cmu.edu/\,biglou/resources/bad-words.txt.Google Scholar
- Robert A. Wagner and Michael J. Fischer. 1974. The string-to-string correction problem. Journal of the ACM 21, 1, 168--173. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/321796.321811 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jing Wang, Clement T. Yu, Philip S. Yu, Bing Liu, and Weiyi Meng. 2015. Diversionary comments under blog posts. ACM Transactions on the Web 9, 4, Article No. 18. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2789211 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Wenbo Wang, Lu Chen, Krishnaprasad Thirunarayan, and Amit P. Sheth. 2014. Cursing in English on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. ACM, New York, NY, 415--425. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Zeerak Waseem and Dirk Hovy. 2016. Hateful symbols or hateful people? Predictive features for hate speech detection on Twitter. In Proceedings of North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 88--93. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Guang Xiang, Bin Fan, Ling Wang, Jason Hong, and Carolyn Rose. 2012. Detecting offensive tweets via topical feature discovery over a large scale Twitter corpus. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ACM, New York, NY. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Zhi Xu and Sencun Zhu. 2010. Filtering offensive language in online communities using grammatical relations. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual Collaboration, Electronic Messaging, Anti-Abuse, and Spam Conference. 1--10.Google Scholar
- Xiaochun Yang, Tao Qiu, Bin Wang, Baihua Zheng, Yaoshu Wang, and Chen Li. 2016. Negative factor: Improving regular-expression matching in strings. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 40, 4, Article No. 25. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2847525 Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Xinwang Zhong. 2014. Deobfuscation based on edit distance algorithm for spam filtering. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Vol. 1. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 109--114. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
Index Terms
On Obstructing Obscenity Obfuscation
Recommendations
Partial evaluation of string obfuscations for Java malware detection
AbstractThe fact that Java is platform independent gives hackers the opportunity to write exploits that can target users on any platform, which has a JVM implementation. Metasploit is a well-known source of Java exploits and to circumvent detection by ...
Obfuscation: The Hidden Malware
A cyberwar exists between malware writers and antimalware researchers. At this war's heart rages a weapons race that originated in the 80s with the first computer virus. Obfuscation is one of the latest strategies to camouflage the telltale signs of ...
Malware Obfuscation Techniques: A Brief Survey
BWCCA '10: Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Broadband, Wireless Computing, Communication and ApplicationsAs the obfuscation is widely used by malware writers to evade antivirus scanners, so it becomes important to analyze how this technique is applied to malwares. This paper explores the malware obfuscation techniques while reviewing the encrypted, ...






Comments